Gordon,
            I am just back in Paris, and immediately hunted for the
   article in question, which was an excellent article on the tribulations
   of tuning, in lute news No 79 October 2006, P11-14.
   I see that my memory did not completely fail me, as I fear happens
   rather often these days, but has just faded a little, as I collapsed
   your article with the comments that followed it.
   On page 13, you simply make the objective statement: "Stress seems to
   affect our ability to hear pitch differencesa
    and it does this in very unfortunate ways. I find that any stress
   makes it harder for me to tune, but sadly much more likely to hear
   imperfections." and go on to say that "This can make you unhappy with
   the tuning of your lute and that uncertainness affect your
   concentration and cause lapses". I am very aware of this
   hyper-self-critical tendency (a sort of negative feed-back) which
   results in a worsening performance.
   However, it was a comment from the floor, which took this question up
   again, and makes the remark I was remembering, see p.14 :
   "On the subject of stress and tuning, someone noted the old musician's
   adage that 'you can only play what you are', as a person that is; and
   asserted that highly-strung nervous musicians tend to play faster and
   sharper, and very relaxed or lazy ones may play slower, and flatter."
   Again, I recognize my own tendency, here (in the first case); but,
   unfortunately, there is no indication about the person who did make
   this remark, and I misattributed it to yourself.
   Regards
   Anthony
     __________________________________________________________________

   De : Gordon Gregory <gor...@gordongregory.co.uk>
   A : Lute List <lute@cs.dartmouth.edu>
   Envoye le : Samedi 7 Janvier 2012 15h47
   Objet : [LUTE] Re: tuning fork at 433Hz?
   I don't think it was me made the remarks about tense people tuning
   sharp,
   it's not an effect I've noticed.
   Gordon
   -----Original Message-----
   From: [1]lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu
   [mailto:[2]lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu] On Behalf
   Of Anthony Hind
   Sent: 07 January 2012 13:59
   To: [3]t...@heartistrymusic.com; [4]e...@gamutstrings.com;
   [5]howardpos...@ca.rr.com
   Cc: [6]lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
   Subject: [LUTE] Re: tuning fork at 433Hz?
       Thank you all for your responses, and your detailed explanations,
   Tom.
     I agree that
     "In fact, that's one reason pitch has risen over the past few hundred
     years - more string tension = higher volume and brighter sound.  Even
     today some orchestras tune to 442 -444, to take advantage of this
     effect."
     and this search for brightness, also partly explains the change from
     gut strung instruments to metal strung ones (while of course the
     fragility of gut stringing might perhaps have kept pitch down to save
     string breakage).
     I recently heard a performance of Stravinsky's Pulcinella on "period
     brass instruments" and a gut strung bowed section by the "Musiciens
   du
     Louvre-Grenoble" (Mark Minkowski director); MM argued that even in
   1905
     gut stringing was fairly standard. He did not say at which pitch they
     were playing, however, I presume it may have been at  433 Hz. The
     performance was in no way unsatisfactory, as the modern "brightness"
     was replaced by more harmonic texturing, coming both from the gut
     strings, and from the warmer but also "rougher" sounding period brass
     instruments. While the threads of the music remained exceptionally
     clear, as no instrument type seemed to be covering the other.
     In relation to tuning over high, I seem to remember that in an
   article
     on tuning, Gordon Gregory suggested that relaxed people tend to tune
     too low, while tense people would tend to tune too high (I certainly
     read that somewhere, but not certain it was in Gordon's article).
     However, this coincides well with my own experience, as I always tend
     to tune too high, if I tune by ear (I would certainly not classify
     myself as relaxed).
     Relative brightness would be associated with increased emotional
     tension, which by some, might be felt as somehow a more exciting
     sound.
     Tuning too high,  as Ed says, does result in out-of-tuneness, but it
     can also be considered as an over-bright tonal aberration. In
   relation
     to this (and the above), it is recorded in many hifi sites that a
     change from over bright distorting resistors and capacitors to better
     noise performance ones, initially results in the hifi enthusiasts
     feeling that the sound is less exciting (something is missing),
   before
     they finally realize they are suffering less listener's fatigue
   (could
     be the same with the change to better mics).
     Perhaps a piece played at 433 may therefore somehow sound more
   relaxed
     (and just as interesting on harmonically rich period instruments),
   when
     compared to 440 on modern instruments (or period instruments that
   have
     been altered to support modern string tensions); although it would
     indeed seem difficult to explain why 433 might be the "harmonic
     frequency of the universe".
     Ed's description of competitive tuning between violinists (presumably
     not gut strung), reminds me of a  tale about a televised presidential
     debate between two candidates here in France. One of the contestants
     was rather short, and his advisers kept bringing in cushions to make
     him look taller, but of course those of his taller opponent, began
     reacting similarly, resulting in something of a "Lewis Carrol" moment
     for my friend who was organizing the filming.
     Back to Ed, how those Baroque Strads must have suffered over the
   years
     from this almost "Darwinian" striving to be better heard than your
     neighbour.
     Regards
     Anthony
     PS I will think of you Tom, if I decide to let it go.
     When I am back in Paris I will make a photo of the fork with
     resonator-case.
     --- En date de : Ven 6.1.12, [7]t...@heartistrymusic.com
     <[8]t...@heartistrymusic.com> a ecrit :
       De: [9]t...@heartistrymusic.com <[10]t...@heartistrymusic.com>
       Objet: Re: [LUTE] tuning fork at 433Hz?
       A: [11]lute@cs.dartmouth.edu, "Anthony Hind"
   <[12]agno3ph...@yahoo.com>
       Date: Vendredi 6 janvier 2012, 23h39
       This is very interesting to me, because an old friend recently
     alerted me to
     a new line of thinking claiming that 432Hz OUGHT to be true concert
     pitch.
     There are websites devoting a lot of space to articles and
   discussions
     about this.
     [1][13]http://www.omega432.com/music.html
     [2][14]http://www.solfeggiotones.com/432-hz/

   [3][15]http://radicalfilms.co.uk/2007/12/26/a-432hz-vs-a-440hz-a-sonic-
   expe
     riment-fascinating/
       People claim things like "it FEELS better", or "it's the harmonic
     frequency of the universe" ...
     ("New Age" / "Airy-Fairey" ...)
     As a piano technician with perfect pitch, I'm pretty locked into 440.
     But it's fun to experiment
     with other pitches and temperments.  Plus, I am human and cannot say
     that I'm ALWAYS
     spot on standard pitch, although I'm usually so close it doesn't
     matter.  I still use a fork to set
     A4.  But when it comes to tuning my lute or guitar I just "ear" it.
   I
     tune my lute low.
     Sometimes I tune my guitar a smidge higher when playing solo to get a
     brighter sound.
     In fact, that's one reason pitch has risen over the past few hundred
     years - more string
     tension = higher volume and brighter sound.  Even today some
   orchestras
     tune to 442 -444,
     to take advantage of this effect.
       Anthony, if you ever decide you'd like to part with your 433 fork
   I'd
     be interested in having it.
     Then maybe I, too, can be in harmony with the universe! (Or close to
     it?)
       Tom
     >    Dear luthenists
     >          A friend gave me an amusing tuning fork, which is clearly
     of
     >    some age.
     >    I am not (here) in a position to be able to load a photo of it,
     but
     >    it fits into a tight wooden case, and at the end of this there
   is
     a
     >    hollow metal peg. I quickly realized that if you place the case
   on
     >    a table, and set the tuning fork ringing while holding it in the
     >    metal peg's hollow, the resonance is amplified. I measure the
     >    resonance as 433Hz. Would this be the London Philharmonic
     Orchestra
     >    pitch of 1826? This is what I read at
     >

   [4][16]http://www.antsmarching.org/forum/archive/index.php/t-84975.html
     >    "In 1939, an International Conference met in London and
     unanimously
     >    adopted 440 Hz as the standard frequency for the pitch A4, and
     that
     >    is the almost universal standard at present. Previously, the
     >    standard was A=435 (fixed, Paris Academy, 1859, as diapason
     normal;
     >    and confirmed, Vienna conference, 1885, as international pitch).
     >    The National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST)
     >    broadcasts a precise 440 Hz reference tone on its short wave
   radio
     >    station WWV (Along with time data). In the 1800's there was also
     >    Philharmonic Pitch, that of the London Philharmonic Orchestra.
   It
     >    varied from 1826, were A=433 Hz, and in 1845, was raised to
   A=455
     >    Hz. Historically it has ranged from A=403 Hz to 567 Hz. !!!"
   What
     >    do you think. The fork is unfortunately not perfect, having been
     >    effected by some rust, but I don't think this would explain the
     >    433HZ. I was not intending to use it, but it is an entertaining
     >    looking (if no doubt useless) object. Regards Anthony
     >
     >    --
     >
     >
     > To get on or off this list see list information at
     > [5][17]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/~wbc/lute-admin/index.html
     Tom Draughon
     Heartistry Music
     [6][18]http://www.heartistry.com/artists/tom.html
     714  9th Avenue West
     Ashland, WI  54806
     715-682-9362
     --
   References
     1. [19]http://www.omega432.com/music.html
     2. [20]http://www.solfeggiotones.com/432-hz/
     3.
   [21]http://radicalfilms.co.uk/2007/12/26/a-432hz-vs-a-440hz-a-sonic-exp
   eriment-f
   ascinating/
     4.
   [22]http://www.antsmarching.org/forum/archive/index.php/t-84975.html
     5. [23]http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/%7Ewbc/lute-admin/index.html
     6. [24]http://www.heartistry.com/artists/tom.html

   --

References

   1. mailto:lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu
   2. mailto:lute-...@cs.dartmouth.edu
   3. mailto:t...@heartistrymusic.com
   4. mailto:e...@gamutstrings.com
   5. mailto:howardpos...@ca.rr.com
   6. mailto:lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
   7. mailto:t...@heartistrymusic.com
   8. mailto:t...@heartistrymusic.com
   9. mailto:t...@heartistrymusic.com
  10. mailto:t...@heartistrymusic.com
  11. mailto:lute@cs.dartmouth.edu
  12. mailto:agno3ph...@yahoo.com
  13. http://www.omega432.com/music.html
  14. http://www.solfeggiotones.com/432-hz/
  15. http://radicalfilms.co.uk/2007/12/26/a-432hz-vs-a-440hz-a-sonic-expe
  16. http://www.antsmarching.org/forum/archive/index.php/t-84975.html
  17. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/%7Ewbc/lute-admin/index.html
  18. http://www.heartistry.com/artists/tom.html
  19. http://www.omega432.com/music.html
  20. http://www.solfeggiotones.com/432-hz/
  21. 
http://radicalfilms.co.uk/2007/12/26/a-432hz-vs-a-440hz-a-sonic-experiment-f
  22. http://www.antsmarching.org/forum/archive/index.php/t-84975.html
  23. http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/%7Ewbc/lute-admin/index.html
  24. http://www.heartistry.com/artists/tom.html

Reply via email to